Re: Brooks RE: [Synoptic-L] Early interpolations
- At 02:01 AM 9/4/2011, will wrote:
>". . . For there have, I think, been many persons and there areThanks, Will.
>still some who
>have devoted their powers of speaking to the destruction of their fellow-men."
>Institutio Oratoria, Book II xx. 2
Now, as someone else has pointed out, it is possible that Jeff
Peterson's opening comment was a snide allusion to Bruce Brooks.
If so, then Bruce's snide reply was justified. Sometimes, such subtle
barbs elude me. I simply understood "the exegete" in question to
refer to the ancient copyist, rather than any one of our current
company. If that was the case, then the Quintillian quote seems
inapt, because the target of the barb is an unknown scribe. Usually,
ad hominem remarks are directed at a particular person well-known to
So, if I missed the subtle exchange of barbs, then I withdraw my comment.
However, I interpreted Jeff's remarks as an exercise in Textual Criticism
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism), and while I am no
expert in that field, his remarks seemed quite appropriate in that
context if "the exegete" referred only to the ancient scribe(s) in question.
Northern Arizona University
>----- Original Message -----[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>From: "Bob Schacht" <r_schacht@...>
>To: <Synoptic@yahoogroups.com>; <Synoptic@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2011 4:41 AM
>Subject: Brooks RE: [Synoptic-L] Early interpolations
> > At 08:26 PM 9/3/2011, E Bruce Brooks wrote:
> >>To: Synoptic
> >>In Response To: Jeff Peterson
> >>On: 1 Cor 4:6b as Interpolation
> >>From: Bruce
> >>JEFF: My impression of proposed interpolations to NT texts (so
> far!) is that
> >>they typically indicate a failure on the part of the exegete to perceive
> >>what's going on in the text.
> >>BRUCE: I think it has been recognized since at least the time of Quintilian
> >>that statements about people don't greatly advance discussions about
> > I think this is rude and inappropriate response to Jeff's point.
> > One of the important aspects of understanding philological issues
> > like this is to understand the human context in which the copies that
> > we have were made. In that sense, the role of "people" in producing
> > the text is quite relevant. Jeff is addressing that point.
> > Furthermore, I suspect that Quintillian was making a rather different
> > point than you are. Would you care to share the quote?
> > Bob Schacht
> > Northern Arizona University
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>Synoptic-L homepage: http://NTGateway.com/synoptic-lYahoo! Groups Links
- Out of curiosity I tried this search on Google Books
interpolation OR interpolated OR interpolate
subject:"Gospels" or "New Testament
I got about 10 hits - far fewer than I expected. On looking at
these (where that was possible) I noted a considerable variety
of usage. One or other of the terms is used (in the books located)
in relation to Mat.27.16; Mk.1.2; Lk 9-18; Jn 1.6-8 & 15; 3.22-30;
Jn 19.35, 21.24; Rom 15-16;1 Cor.1.2-16;Josephus Apion Bk.2,or the
Gospel of Nicodemus
Some are "editorial" interpolations, some are interpolations with
textual evidence, but I think one or two may be neither of these.
As it would seem that writers of the available books don't use the term
much I then turned to the ATLA database of journal articles
with a similar search for
"interpolation OR interpolated OR interpolate" (in full text) AND
subject:"Gospels" Date 1950-2011
This got 44 hits from a shorter span of time, most of them from items
available in pdf, but not showing where the hits are, or what they include.
(To check these one would need to do a lot of downloads and pdf searches.)
Tentative conclusion: it would seem that articles use the term more
than books do, but the snippet results from Google Books provide a
handy list of varied examples from the NT of three different types of
David Mealand, University of Edinburgh
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.